'Lone Star' Not Canceled By Fox… Yet

Despite its disastrous premiere this week, the new Fox drama series Lone Starwillair its second episode next Monday at 9 PM as planned. So don’t believe that Internet chatter to the contrary. That said, I hear the network is going to be looking very closely at whether the dismal numbers improve for the series that night. Otherwise, the show could have a short future. But Fox execs are shattered. They thought they got this one right.

55 Comments

guy • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Someone call in Kavorkian. Game’s over kids.

George • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

I haven’t watched Lone Star yet, but with the reviews and handwringing about its fate, I’ll catch it on Hulu this weekend. Was wondering if FX would be a possible home for the show, say mid-season? Given the storyline and ambiguous main character, it would seem a better fit for that network (where Kevin Reilly hails from). Perhaps there are too many resemblances to The Riches, plus FX wouldn’t want to be thought of as a dumping ground for Fox’s failures?

namegame • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

What a terrible name. That’s their first problem. I feel like Chuck Norris would be starring in this series.

Yup • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Yup. Needs a broader title. You turn on anyone in Texas, people who are often ignored, but you turn off, ironically enough, the liberal elite. Or just teenagers, young adults, and hip, discerning baby boomers. So sad. We need more quality pilots. Everything I read is garbage.

Wally • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Uh, the title worked well enough for John Sayles. That’s a great movie.

S. • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

If only it had musical numbers, then it might have matched Viva Laughlin premiere demo.

Anonymous • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Still, Hugh Jackman was bad ass in that!

blather • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

I can’t wait not to watch.

F. • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

This is my new fave line!

Ethan • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

No cancelled… yet, but… soon.

Wuss Move • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Give me a break. They should just get on with it.

Next year Fox should try producing television series, and not movie ideas masquerading as TV shows.

You can’t expect a show about a con man swindling people out of their money (during tough economic times) to find a broad audience. And you sure as hell can’t count on women (aka 55% of the network viewing audience) to root for a guy who is cheating on two women. This MIGHT have worked on FX… but probably not.

Fox passed on several dramas that might have hit, in favor of this thing. And it never had a chance.

Welcome to television, Mr. Rice.

bellafilm • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

How is this a movie premise? The show is about a man trying to get out of the Con world. It is as episodic as Sopranos and if anything a more empathetic character who longs for human connection instead of eschewing it.

Seems like you know nothing about the show. Not even that it tested very positively with women.

BellaSerious? • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Um… there are a million con man movies with protagonists who do unlike-able stuff. There are none TV shows with that premise. And now that a network was dumb enough to try one, there will still be none.

It IS a movie premise.

And a jerk (even a charming one) who rips off hard working, honest people (the producers, writer, and execs weren’t even smart enough to make the marks greedy assholes) and has two wives who don’t know it – is not the lead of a successful network TV series, and won’t be in our lifetime.

Testing is one thing. Marketing is another. A marketable premise comes first. It is the truer test, and this show failed.

Zachary • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

A marketable premise comes first. It is the truer test, and this show failed.

A marketable premise? Like, a plane crashes on an island and it survivors have to dodge a polar bear and a smoke monster? Yeah, that would sell today.

SeriousSam • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

” there are a million con man movies with protagonists who do unlike-able stuff. There are none TV shows with that premise.”

What the fuck? Are you for real, man? Your logic basically boils down to because something exists more in one medium, it can’t work in another. Holy shit, I think I’m going to have an aneurysm. Do you know why? Because your batshit reasoning skills mean there would be no Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Sopranos, 24, Lost, Glee, Boardwalk Empire (just started out, but it’s pretty safe to add…), etc… all of which took traditional genre film staples and made them work for the small screen.

So you’re saying that networks shouldn’t take a chance on original programming. This doesn’t just apply to more cinematic television, but at its logical conclusion, applies to innovation period. If that’s not what you meant to say, then that’s your own fault. If you did mean to say that, you’re more fucked up than I could possibly believe.

arthur • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Hey serioussam, I never thought that swearing made any one sound smart or convincing until I read your post. Your brilliantly placed vulgarities were really persuasive!

AJ • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

The people who have watched the show are defending it strongly, but obviously the problem lies in too many people not wanting to watch the show to begin with. The marketing of the premise (and, I agree, the title) chased away far too many viewers. Whether they were mistaken in their assumptions is largely irrelevant.

All I really knew from the commercials I saw for it was that it was about a con man who was deceiving two wives. The title was so disconnected from the premise that I had to ask what “Lonestar” was when I saw it in the listings. “It’s the one about the guy with two wives” was the answer… and the channel was changed.

Fox should yank the series now, before any more damage is done, and bring it back at midseason if they really believe it deserves a chance. *Completely* retool the marketing approach on it, tout the strong reviews and give it the right launch at a time when people are looking for something different.

SeriousSam • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Thank you for an accurate critique of once. I caught the show on Hulu myself the next day so I’m not really gonna argue ratings wise, but the title is kinda meh, and the marketing really went for the wrong angle.

The actual execution of the pilot – from soft focus, overscoring, and some plot cliches, is separate, but overall, I think it’s an admiral start.

LouiePWatkins • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Best show on television this year. Stop watching Dancing with the Stars people.

GoldenApple • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Amen to that Louie.

LoneStarFan • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

I just watched the Lone Star DVD that was inside this month’s Vanity Fair. This is a solid show. In my opinion it has more potential to be a series that could go five years than The Event. Maybe more people will watch it and word of mouth will get around. It has a great central character with a very clear dilemma. Also, if the network believes in the show (and they should) putting it in the most vulnerable time slot against the CBS comedies and the most hyped NBC show since Heroes, did not help it. Move it before you cancel it. For God’s sake FOX, you picked up The Good Guys and gave it all summer. If that stinker can go a whole season, give Lone Star a chance. I’ll watch Lone Star next week over everything else in that time slot. Join me.

IAgree • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

I too watched it (via the VF DVD) and I’ve gotta tell you, I was VERY pleasantly surprised. The characters are solid and the story-line really catchy.

In regard to the comment made above your post:

“You can’t expect a show about a con man swindling people out of their money (during tough economic times) to find a broad audience. And you sure as hell can’t count on women (aka 55% of the network viewing audience) to root for a guy who is cheating on two women. This MIGHT have worked on FX… but probably not.”

The lead character IS a decent guy who was raised one way but is now trying to go straight (or at least seems to have those intentions.)

Maybe Wuss Move didn’t watch the show?

Hopefully it catches on. I’ll be watching next week’s ep.

What? • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

“The character IS a decent guy.”

Really?

I’d say the character has attractive dimples and a nice haircut. But no, he’s not a decent guy. He’s a douche who isn’t honest with either of the women he “loves” and rips off everyone who does business with him.

His excuse is that his dad asked him to do it.

Not exactly the stuff TV shows are made out of. Or at least, that’s what the viewing audience seems to be saying. They voted with their remotes, and it wasn’t because the show wasn’t well produced.

Perhaps it’s just should be on a cable network where ALL the great series are. A place to express creativity.

Really? I don’t get all the *hate* for this show. You bandwagon rating fan followers disgust me.

Poll the people who WATCHED the show, and you will find most liked it. You other idiots with opinions are regurgitating what everyone else is saying.

SeriousSam • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

“He’s a douche who isn’t honest with either of the women he “loves” and rips off everyone who does business with him.”

Riiiiiiiiight. And by changing that, you’ve effectively killed the point of the show. Goddamn, there should be an IQ test to use the internet.

dvelopment • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

not trying to be naive here, but man, what the fuck is with all the haters. Does television have to be done one specific way?!? OK, maybe the show was better meant for cable and FX, but at least it tried to be different. Or do all of you bitter people prefer NCIS:Des Moines?

Wow • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Why not give it six weeks? They probably already have those episodes in the can.

I just don’t understand a hair trigger after one bad night – I guess that’s why I’m not a TV exec.

c4x • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Wow, God forbid a show that’s not jaw-droppingly awful (hi Brothers, Do Not Disturb, Running Wilde, et al). make it to a second episode! I think everyone’s just blood-thirsty and ready to crow about the season’s first casualty.

There are worse shows on air. At least give the show 3 episodes before kicking it to the curb.

Anonymous • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Exactly. Give this show a chance.

Try It Out • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Hey Wuss Move,

If you’d watched the pilot you might have seen that the lead character is a con artist who is on a redemptive journey. He doesn’t want to con anymore, but he grew up in that life with his dad and he wants out of it.

He’s also in love with both of the women and it’s clearly a dilemma… but given the opportunity to cheat on BOTH those women with a 3rd, he chooses not to. It’s actually really, shockingly, sweet.

Why don’t you try it out instead of making offhanded, uninformed snap judgments about stuff you clearly don’t know anything about?

KTHXBI.

nakedpants • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Hey Wuss Move

Your a douche and know nothing about the business. Good work- Try it out!

OR • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Maybe. Perhaps. Wuss Move saw the show. And realized that a grown man who is in the thrall of his father is not a good enough reason to justify cheating on one’s wife, and conning innocent people for years.

It’s not THAT solid of an excuse, and a redemptive journey is great. As long as it doesn’t start from too big of a deficit. Nobody wants to watch The Michael Vick Story just yet. And they probably never will.

All the industry love for this show makes sense. And is kind of sweet. but it is naive and myopic. The market judged Lonestar on its merits as a viable network entertainment. It didn’t make it. It’s nothing to crow about by anyone. On any side of any debate. It’s just a failed show. A pretty good hour, with a pretty iffy premise. That needs to be enough for you insta-superfans.

jake • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

It was on a difficult night, and so critically acclaimed — would Fox really just cancel this show outright? I wish they had given this show the summer preview as opposed to the good guys.

seriouslykevinreilly? • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

God forbid Fox should nurture talent and quality. Just yank it off the air because it did badly ONE NIGHT.

Patrick • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

It is a good show with a lot of potential. Re: title – it was originally called Midlands (I think). Not sure either is better.

DesertEagle • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

So . . . the news in this post is that nothing happened. A show DIDN’T get cancelled. Thanks for the “news.”

Michelle T • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Cheers came in last place its first season. Not saying this is as wonderful a show, but at least it’s trying something a little more interesting than most. It’s certainly the most original new network drama this season, so you would think people on boards like this (who supposedly care about good TV) would be rooting FOR it and not against it.

Yeesh.

Lou • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

So did Seinfeld.

Lonestar deserves to find an audience.

Sheila • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

Of all the shows I’ve seen this new season. Lone Star is by far the best. Hawaii 5-0, you kidding me. It’s just another glossy cop show….in Hawaii. So tired.
The Event – whatever. All gloss….kept my interest up – but you can pretty much watch this show in fast forward. You don’t need to engage. Perfect while on stairmaster with no sound.

Lone Star doesn’t have a future on network TV but I found it very fresh, engaging and off-beat.
Nothing wrong with trying something new folks.

And I do find that most of the “haters” haven’t even seen the show. Don’t be pawns of the nielsen’s ratings and decide for yourself.
Marketing has zero to do with the quality of a show. I didn’t like one piece of the marketing and thoroughly enjoyed the show.

richard • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

can’t speak for what fox network has that’s good or not….but isn’t this really a problem of the schedule. i mean, the show is going up against the established cbs comedy block and dancing with the stars on abc. i can’t speak for anyone else, but i have lone star in my DVR and will watch it this week like many others….if you watch dwts, you almost have to watch it live if you’re going to vote….and i’m guessing other people put the cbs shows and maybe this into the dvr….also…with all the hand ringing about this show….how did nbc’s THE EVENT do?????

Sick and Tired • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

I prefer House Hunters. (International, that is)

slim • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

A network nurturing a good show and trying to make it a success when it’s not out of the bag??? why that’s just rubbish. Other than NBC and FNL, I have not seen much of that in the last decade. And NBC is kindda special since everything they had was in low ratings land anyway.

yeahiknow • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

So you’d rather encourage people to not aspire to anything at all?

Way to be part of the problem idiot.

doug • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

It was an excellent pilot and it would be a shame to not let it play out.

TV101 • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

I have to say FOX has done one of THE WORST jobs marketing this show – like ever in recent memory of any show. The promos awful, print ads, awful – bad descriptions. Just bad. They need to do some MAJOR ad buys in the next week but I doubt they will.

lillifordmcgilicutty • on Sep 22, 2010 1:59 pm

This is one of the best shows i have seen in a LONG time – end of story. Unfortunately, it appears America would rather watch The Situation fist pump his way through the fall season as opposed to being entertained by well written and impeccably acted dialogue. Jimmy Wolk and Adrianne Palicki are breakout STARS. NO question.. I don’t really know what to say except that I am embarrassed of how dumb down our programming has to get just to gain the American audience’s attention. Sad.